MX2 Training Program 14G Phased Array Analysis-Flaw Charaterization

OmniScan MX2 Training Program
Phased Array Analysis

Flaw Characterization
OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis Flaw Characterization Overview

Flaw characterization is the ability to differentiate flaw types, failure mechanisms,
and geometric reflectors.
The ability to differentiate geometric reflectors from real flaws, planer reflectors
from volumetric reflectors, slag, porosity, lack of fusion, cracks, inadequate
penetration, etc.
The best and most reliable indicator for knowing exactly what you are looking at in
phased array or UT data is experience and familiarity with the job at hand. The
benefit of having analyzed many welds or components under the same fabrication
conditions cannot be overcome with any amount of training and practice. What
does a good weld look like under normal working conditions?
Flaw characterization is beneficial for weld or manufacturing process improvement
but may or may not be necessary for the referencing code for the UT inspection.
In some referencing codes like the AWS D1.1, the inspector need not differentiate
between slag and lack of fusion to make an acceptance decision.
In the ASME sec VIII vessel inspection the acceptance criteria allows slag and
porosity of some length, but must reject any non fusion, IP, or cracks requiring
every flaw to be categorized.
2
OmniScan MX2 Training Flaw Characterization Overview cont.

There are three primary indicators for flaw characterization:
1. Flaw location or volumetric position.
2. Can the flaw be detected from both sides of the weld? Does it plot to the same position?
3. Phased array imaging and A-scan characterization.
With the exception of the phased array imaging these are the same
indicators used for both manual and automated conventional UT.
Knowledge of the weld process is also helpful. You can eliminate porosity
or slag as a flaw possibility for processes that do not produce them,
obviously.
In-service inspections are typically for cracks and metal loss. Although
cracks can occur in any environment, new construction welds are primarily
for fabrication defects such as IP, LOF, slag, porosity, etc.
Unlike eddy current and similar technologies, it is normally necessary to
have participated in the PA acquisition to be very proficient in the analysis
due to differences in weld processes and inspection conditions from one
job to another.
3
MX2 Training Program Displaying Data A-scan Point Quantity

The higher the point quantity the better the resolution on the A-scan.
The point quantity is a compromise between file size and A-scan resolution.
320-640 points is sufficient for the most common inspections and ensures precision
readings.
The A-scan point quantity
default setting is 320 points
and can be modified in
UT>Advanced>Point
Quantity.
The higher the point count,
the better the flaw
characterization. Especially
when differentiating
between planer and
volumetric flaws.
OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis A-scan Characterization

Volumetric flaws have a very different appearance than planer flaws, and like in the
A-scan data view, the phased array view can differentiate between the two based on
their appearance.
Planer flaws such as root non fusion and side wall lack of fusion or geometry are
indicated by a short A-scan rise and fall time or short Echo dynamic similarly to an
ID notch or radius reflector.
Volumetric flaws like slag and porosity will have an A-scan long rise and fall time
with multiple peaks.
A-scan planer indication
A-scan volumetric indication
OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis S-scan Characterization

Volumetric flaws have a different
appearance from planer flaws, and
like in the A-scan data view, the
phased array view can differentiate
between the two based on their
signal characterization.
All of the A-scan data is available in
the S-scan. Nothing is lost. It is
simply a view that allows multiple Ascan interpretation in one display.
While visualizing the S-scan, start
to imagine what the corresponding
A-scan will look like for any given
focal law.
Note jagged, multi-faceted
appearance vs. clean sharp
indications.
Short echo dynamic (A-scan rise
and fall time) vs. long.
Porosity (Volumetric defect)
Side wall lack of fusion (Planer defect)
OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis Flaw Characterization Examples

The next series of slides are examples of specific types of defects and the
associated flaw reporting details for:
Maximum amplitude. (May or may not be the focal law used for reporting)
Flaw depth. (DA reading at position of maximum amplitude)
Volumetric position. (VIA reading)
Flaw height (Through wall dimension of the flaw using UT axis cursors and Um-r reading)
Flaw scan start. (Start position of the flaw on scan axis using Sr reading)
Flaw scan stop. (Stop position of the flaw on the scan axis using the Sm reading)
Flaw scan max. (The position on the scan axis of maximum amplitude)
Flaw length. (Delta between flaw start and stop using Sm-r reading)
ID connected, Embedded, or OD connected. (Sometimes required for a code acceptance
decision.
Flaw characterization. (What type of flaw: Slag, porosity, crack, lack of fusion, etc)
Each example has an associated data file and movie with specific indicators
unique to the example.
OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis Flaw Characterization TF_1 Flaw 1

Measured on 65.5 degree focal law
Max amplitude (A%) = 87.3%
Depth (DA) = 14.94mm
Volumetric pos. (VIA) = -1.62mm
Height (Um-r) = 2.38mm
Scan start (Sr) = 0mm
Scan stop (Sm) = 9mm
Scan max (Data cursor) = 5mm
Length (Sm-r) = 9mm
ID connected
Flaw type = Lack of root fusion

Measured on 72 degree focal law
Volume pos. (VIA) = 2.75mm
Height (Um-r) = ? ***
Scan start (Sr) = 26.25mm
Scan stop (Sm) = 29.75mm
Scan max (Data cursor) = 27.5mm
Length (Sm-r) = 3.5mm
Embedded
*** It is not possible to know the height of the flaw because the S-scan did not have enough coverage. At
the position of the 72 degree focal law it is obvious the flaw is only partially detected.
9

Depth (DA) = 4.20mm
Volume pos. (VIA) = -7.40mm
Embedded
Flaw type = Lack of side wall fusion
When measuring the height or through wall dimension of the flaw it is possible that the high spot and low
spot occur at different positions on the scan axis. The S-scan only shows one slice at a time.
Using the UT axis data cursors on the S-scan, mark the top and bottom of the flaw while scrolling through
the data on the scan axis to ensure the entire flaw is within the cursors.
10

ID Connected
The weld overlays are close approximations for the data but will have a position error equal to the scanner
movement error on the index axis. (In and out from the weld). When differentiating between lack of root
fusion and IP the primary indicators are: Detection from both sides? and A-scan and S-scan
characterization. It is not always an exact science and repetitive inspections on the same weld bevel is
extremely helpful. (Experience)
11
OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis Flaw Characterization TF_2

Depth (DA) = 4.12 mm
Length (Sm-r) = 17mm
Embedded
Flaw type = Porosity
Porosity is best detected on the skip in the second leg. Of common weld flaws, porosity is the most likely
to be missed and typically a low amplitude multi peaked volumetric type defect with long echo dynamic.
Detection, sizing and characterization of porosity is greatly improved by the use of a .5 degree S-scan
resolution, 5-10 MHz probe frequency, and a high point quantity on the A-scan horizontal axis.
12

Crack tip measured on 53.5 degree
focal law at 21mm
Max amplitude (A%) = 80.2% on
50.5 degree focal law
Volume pos. (VIA) = -4.56
Height (Um-r) = 4mm
ID Connected
Flaw type = ID crack
13

Embedded
Flaw type = Lack of sidewall fusion
14

Depth (DA) = 5.14mm
Volume pos. (VIA) = -.085
Embedded
Flaw type = Intermittent low level
acceptable slag
Depth and height sizing for slag would not typically have a through wall dimension larger than a weld
pass. Low level acceptable slag to ASME V, ASME VIII, API 1104 and AWS D1.1.
15

Crack tip measured on 58.5
degree focal law at 23mm on
scan axis
measured on 52 degree focal
law at 20mm on scan axis
Depth (DA) = 7.99mm
Height (Um-r) = 4mm
ID connected
16

measured on 61 degree focal law
at 50mm on scan axis
Depth (DA) = 8.68mm
Volume pos. (VIA) = .76mm
Embedded
Flaw type = Porosity
When to use -3, -6 dB drop sizing?
It depends on probe frequency,
sound path, PA focus, curved
focused array, weld bevel, weld
process, etc. Destructive testing
will improve sizing procedure. Be
conservative. Trend is to oversize
flaws.
17

measured on 67.5 degree focal
Depth (DA) = 6.94mm
Volume pos. (VIA) = 3.30mm
Height (Um-r) = Unknown due
to one sided access. Must flat
top weld for precision
measurement
Scan max (Data cursor) =
41mm
Embedded (Does not extend to
ID root)
Flaw type = Lack of sidewall
fusion detected on far side
weld bevel.
Length sizing is reduced due to
high amplitude saturated signal
18

Max amplitude = 181.2%
measured on 69 degree focal
Depth (DA) = 12mm
Volume pos. (VIA) = 0 (IP)
Height (Um-r) = NA (IP)
Scan max (Data cursor) =
70mm
ID Connected
Flaw type = Inadequate
penetration
Inadequate penetration does not require depth sizing or tip diffraction, only amplitude and length sizing.
Typically an automatic reject for all construction codes.
19

Max amplitude = 72% measured on
59.5 degree focal law at 48mm on
scan axis.
Volume pos. (VIA) = -.59mm
Length (Sm-r) = 7mm
Embedded
Flaw type = Slag
From one position on the scan axis it is not possible to easily differentiate between slag and lack of fusion.
It is not an exact science and location relative to the weld should weigh heavily. Zoom on the defect and
observe the S-scan while changing position. Between 43-46mm is evidence of multi faceted volumetric
defect indicative of slag or porosity.
20

Max amplitude = 99.8% measured on 52
degree focal law at 32mm on scan axis.
Depth (DA) = 3.7 mm
Embedded
Use the UT axis measure cursers and do not trust your eyes. The top and bottom of the lack of fusion
may appear at different positions on the scan axis. Mark the defect with the UT cursors and observe
the S-scan while moving the data curser dynamically on the scan axis of the C-scan with the scroll
knob or mouse. Ensure the entire defect is contained within the UT axis cursors.
21

Crack tip measured on 59.5 degree
focal law at 42mm on the scan axis
Max amplitude (A%) = 80.2% on
51.5 degree focal law at 41mm on
scan axis
Depth (DA) = 7.63mm
ID Connected
22

Crack tip measured on 58 degree
focal law at 66mm on the scan axis
Max amplitude (A%) = 94.7% on 53
degree focal law at 66mm on scan
axis
ID Connected
23

Max amplitude = 81.8% measured on 54.5
degree focal law at 61mm on scan axis.
Embedded
24
OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis TF_32vs16 Aperture
1mm wide X 10mm deep calibration notch detected by a 32 element high resolution aperture group (.2
degree S-scan resolution), and a 16 element low resolution group (1 degree S-scan resolution).
Practice sizing to demonstrate benefit of high resolution group.
25
OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis TF_Pos_C-scan
Position C-scan acquired with RexoFORM and 1mm pitch A14 probe. Material is 14.6mm plexiglass.
Thinnest data point of 4.45mm occurs at 119.5 on scan axis and 9mm on index axis.
Practice changing color palette (Display>Properties>Category Color Palette) and using thickness
functions (Gate>Alarm>Thickness>Source).
26
OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis TF_Pos C-scan Improved Res.
Position C-scan acquired with RexoFORM and A14 1mm pitch probe.
How can the C-scan on the index axis be acquired at .5mm if the probe is 1mm pitch?
Demonstrate the benefits and costs of a PA configuration using Improved resolution.
27
OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis TF_TCG vs. DAC
Two identical groups detecting lack of root penetration simultaneously using same PA configuration.
One calibrated with TCG and one calibrated with DAC.
Demonstrate the benefits of TCG color palette and DAC related readings.
28
OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis TF_TCG Verification
An encoded TCG calibration verification scan of a NAVSHIP block using an A12 .6mm probe.
Demonstrate benefit of A-scan envelope usage and ability to maintain 80% amplitude at multiple depths
for all focal laws.
Use for explanation of amplitude C-scan analysis. 29
OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis TF_TCG Off
This is a scan of the same NAVSHIP calibration block without the benefit of the TCG.
What is the difference in data analysis if no TCG calibration was performed?
30
OmniScan MX2 Training PA Analysis Movie
31
Free Download Manager.lnk

MX2 Training Program 14G Phased Array Analysis-Flaw Charaterization

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

MX2 Training Program 14G Phased Array Analysis-Flaw Charaterization

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

OmniScan MX2 Training Program

Phased Array Analysis

OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis Flaw Characterization Overview

OmniScan MX2 Training Flaw Characterization Overview cont.

MX2 Training Program Displaying Data A-scan Point Quantity

OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis A-scan Characterization

A-scan volumetric indication

OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis S-scan Characterization

Porosity (Volumetric defect)

Side wall lack of fusion (Planer defect)

OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis Flaw Characterization Examples

OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis Flaw Characterization TF_1 Flaw 1

OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis Flaw Characterization TF_1 Flaw 2

OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis Flaw Characterization TF_1 Flaw 3

OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis Flaw Characterization TF_1 Flaw 4

OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis Flaw Characterization TF_2

OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis Flaw Characterization TF_3

OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis Flaw Characterization TF_4

OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis Flaw Characterization TF_5

OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis Flaw Characterization TF_6

OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis Flaw Characterization TF_7

OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis Flaw Characterization TF_8

OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis Flaw Characterization TF_9

OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis Flaw Characterization TF_10

OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis Flaw Characterization TF_11

OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis Flaw Characterization TF_12

OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis Flaw Characterization TF_13

OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis Flaw Characterization TF_14

OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis TF_32vs16 Aperture

OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis TF_Pos_C-scan

OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis TF_Pos C-scan Improved Res.

OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis TF_TCG vs. DAC

OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis TF_TCG Verification

OmniScan MX2 Training Analysis TF_TCG Off

OmniScan MX2 Training PA Analysis Movie

Free Download Manager.lnk

You might also like